Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Treating beef like coal would make a big dent in greenhouse-gas emissions

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 344 posts

Re: Treating beef like coal would make a big dent in greenhouse-gas emissions

#291

Post by zinekeller »

p49k wrote: post #288
kart23 wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

did speed limits really make things better though? germany has the autobahn and sections with no speed limit, yet their roadways are much safer than the US.

The flaw in logic here is to assume that Germany and the US are otherwise identical in policy. But of course that's not remotely true. Germany roads are safer because - Drivers are required to obtain an extensive education at a licensed driving school and pass a rigorous test before being allowed to drive. - Driving rules such as "no passing on the right" are strictly enforced in Germany, creating a more predictable…

- Moreover, German vehicles (meaning vehicles registered in Germany, not vehicles from German brands/factories) must pass strict tests every two years (for vehicles less than 10 years) or yearly (10 years or more).

Some US states have a looser policy on this.

Re: Treating beef like coal would make a big dent in greenhouse-gas emissions

#292

Post by hhhhhdsgs »

wumpus wrote: post #220
axiolite wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is “pumping loss “? Unlike older scientific topics that have esoteric terminology, usually from the Latin, this one is pretty straight forward... It is the energy lost due to pumping. Basically, the overhead of keeping an engine running no matter how much distance of roadway you cover, but more on point, the extra losses due to running an engine outside of its peak power/performance range: https://www.cyclewor…

Weird, does this apply to EV's, too?

its the opposite for EVs. Their range decreases as their speed increases due to the increased effect of wind resistance

Re: Treating beef like coal would make a big dent in greenhouse-gas emissions

#293

Post by adrianN »

GhettoComputers wrote: post #289
adrianN wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd implement a high price on carbon(-equivalents) and let the market figure out where it is cheapest to reduce emissions first. I'd probably also get rid of many subsidies.

The question was about your personal energy expended on changing public opinion and making a greener environment, not if you are in power and have dictatorship powers, unless you have a path to that point. What do you think is the most efficient usage of your time to lower emissions? The Dominican Republic had a very green dictatorship who was sadly assassinated but his trees have protected the country on there and i…

The most efficient usage of my time to lower emissions is donating part of my income to lobby groups that try to convince politicians to enact meaningful policies wrt climate change.

Re: Treating beef like coal would make a big dent in greenhouse-gas emissions

#294

Post by tfehring »

GhettoComputers wrote: post #275
tfehring wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure about the potential for a private entity to sue another private entity for those damages - but sure, to the extent that beef production creates positive externalities, the value of those externalities should also be priced in. Though most of the warming potential from cattle farming comes from methane, not carbon dioxide, so I'd be surprised if it actually had a nonnegligible impact on crop yields, let alone…

Does the existance of a carbon tax in parts of Europe and usage of carbon credits show it is not that unpopular? California's electronics tax I always saw as a carbon tax in disguise. It would be labeled as moral code but in effect are taxes.

Not familiar with European politics but wasn’t a carbon tax one of the principal reasons for the yellow vest protests?

In the US, the vast majority are unwilling to do pretty much anything to fight climate change. ~70% oppose a $0.25/gallon gasoline tax; note that a true Pigouvian tax would be something like 20x higher than that based on the current cost of carbon removal. https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/climate-optimism-of-the-wi...

Re: Treating beef like coal would make a big dent in greenhouse-gas emissions

#295

Post by [deleted] »

wumpus wrote: post #29
seiferteric wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what fungible means... A Watt is a Watt, a soybean is not a steak...

I'm not sure why you think I said a soybean is a steak, but I meant that a soybean is a soybean, corn is corn, and pork bellies are pork bellies, when we're talking about things traded on the commodities markets.

[deleted]

Re: Treating beef like coal would make a big dent in greenhouse-gas emissions

#296

Post by tw04 »

wumpus wrote: post #46
tw04 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess I doing get your point. Fungible means interchangeable. The average consumer doesn’t think twice about whether their electricity comes from coal or solar as long as the lights turn on when they flip the switch. If you try to give someone soy beans when they ordered a steak they’re going to care quite a lot. Food isn’t fungible for the average consumer. That has absolutely nothing to do with it being a commodi…

Soybeans are a fungible commodity. That means that it's fungible with other soybeans. Corn is a fungible commodity. Pork bellies are a fungible commodity. It's a mystery to me as to why you think I said soybeans and steak are the same.

Fungible doesn't mean replacing one item with the exact same item in the way he's using it. It means you're replacing it with something else that serves the same purpose.

Fungible: Able to be substituted for something of equal value or utility;

The entire premise was that coal is fungible because you can replace it with solar, and nobody* cares as long as their lights still turn on. You can't do the same with food, you can't replace beef with soy beans - in fact for most people you can't replace beef with anything, they want beef.

*coal miners care, the vast majority of the public does not

Re: Treating beef like coal would make a big dent in greenhouse-gas emissions

#297

Post by phonypc »

herbst wrote: post #255

How about making meat production more ethical and practical? I live surrounded by cows, literally. The area has no good soil, so every farmer here has like 13 to whatever cows (13 is the magical number of cows you can have without studying agriculture or so, assuming you live in a relevant area). All these cows spend most of the time outside, in the summer they are in the Alps, spring and fall they chill in the field…

And how expensive is it to eat beef from these cows? How many people that currently have a taste for beef could afford eating it regularly if this was the only option?

I'm all for it, but in effect this is just the "massively reduce consumption" argument.

Re: Treating beef like coal would make a big dent in greenhouse-gas emissions

#298

Post by herbst »

phonypc wrote: post #297
herbst wrote: post #255

How about making meat production more ethical and practical? I live surrounded by cows, literally. The area has no good soil, so every farmer here has like 13 to whatever cows (13 is the magical number of cows you can have without studying agriculture or so, assuming you live in a relevant area). All these cows spend most of the time outside, in the summer they are in the Alps, spring and fall they chill in the field…

And how expensive is it to eat beef from these cows? How many people that currently have a taste for beef could afford eating it regularly if this was the only option? I'm all for it, but in effect this is just the "massively reduce consumption" argument.

I haven't found any conclusive numbers. About 6.5% of all beef eaten here is organic. However not organic does not always automatically mean it's 100% bad.

My neighbor's meat is way cheaper than organic meat in supermarkets. Still at least twice as much as 'cheap' meat.

Re: Treating beef like coal would make a big dent in greenhouse-gas emissions

#299

Post by GhettoComputers »

tfehring wrote: post #294
GhettoComputers wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does the existance of a carbon tax in parts of Europe and usage of carbon credits show it is not that unpopular? California's electronics tax I always saw as a carbon tax in disguise. It would be labeled as moral code but in effect are taxes.

Not familiar with European politics but wasn’t a carbon tax one of the principal reasons for the yellow vest protests? In the US, the vast majority are unwilling to do pretty much anything to fight climate change. ~70% oppose a $0.25/gallon gasoline tax; note that a true Pigouvian tax would be something like 20x higher than that based on the current cost of carbon removal. https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/climate-op…

What kind of normal person wants to pay more for gas, especially when most of the population isn't in the upper income bracket in the US and mismanagement of tax funds is so common? I can't imagine why a teenage mother or person struggling with minimum wage desiring these extra costs or more taxes. The usage of the taxes is big issue, it is likely to just be pocketed by the politicians or as subsidies for large corporations that will have a disproportionate pollution effect. Taxes should be properly utilized and be proven through proof or as a fund like social security for the environment, rather than pay more for less and let them decide how to use the money if even its implimented. Nothing stops them from subsidizing gas companies with the taxes.

Re: Treating beef like coal would make a big dent in greenhouse-gas emissions

#300

Post by GhettoComputers »

herbst wrote: post #255

How about making meat production more ethical and practical? I live surrounded by cows, literally. The area has no good soil, so every farmer here has like 13 to whatever cows (13 is the magical number of cows you can have without studying agriculture or so, assuming you live in a relevant area). All these cows spend most of the time outside, in the summer they are in the Alps, spring and fall they chill in the field…

What do you think of using buffalo rather than cows? I don't think they are native to the swiss but in the US they used to be native to the area, I saw this article on them being easier to handle. https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/buffalo-in-the-swiss-a...
Post reply on HN